Edgewise

Why There Is Very Good Reason to Feel a Draft

Need for Draft Is Dismissed by Officials at Pentagon, NYT
Rumors of a secret plan to reinstate the draft are churning across the Internet, worrying some in Congress and even coloring the presidential campaign...Officials note that Congressional proposals for...30,000 to 40,000 more troops, would hardly require a new draft ...

DKo: A few points for perspective:

1. The current situation is already worse than has been recognized. There is normally a substantial recruitment "buffer" maintained: recruits already lined up but not yet called--"in the pipeline." This buffer amounts to about 30% of the next year's requirements. But in the annual cycle just ended, the quota was met only by "borrowing from next year," i.e., by moving up enlistment dates--and thereby emptying the pipeline.

2. The "Stop Loss" policy has kept many people on the rolls (through 11/2, notably), who will drop off as soon as they are able.

3. The very high rate of "re-upping" that the US military has enjoyed in recent years is obviously headed for a downturn--especially in the Guard and the Reserves, more than a million people, who make up about half of US troop strength.
--Active forces are only being asked to re-up into roughly the same--often career oriented--military service they signed up for in the first place.
--But the Guard and Reserve are being asked to join an entirely new kind of military service, one that did not exist before--different from (almost opposite to) anything they'd ever bargained for.

4. The high-tech, small-ground-forces, low-casualty, swift-exit military model--which was going to make America's role as World Cop sustainable--is patently in shreds. So now "Money talks. Bullshit walks." US supremacists will have to either come up with the big troop numbers, or just give up the game.

5. You can get the troops, without a draft, by spending a lot more money on pay, bonuses, services, and benefits. But there are two limits on this:
--Obviously, it breaks the bank on the overall Federal budget.
--But just within the divvy-up of what does go for Defense spending, a larger share for troops will be considered unacceptable.
This will sound merely facetious, and I wish it were. But every dollar we fritter away on the soft stuff--pay, food, housing, clothing, health, and pensions for the troops--is a dollar taken away from the hard-core, high-tech and big-iron, high-development, low-production, unmonitored and uncontrolled contracts to major military contractors.
They do get a piece of the action in clothing and housing too. But that is partial and imperfect. It's the mainlining of pure appropriations they are addicted to. If we don't shoot them up regularly with missile-defense systems and cold-war fighter-bombers, they will die.

"Too big to fail?" That could become a political question that America soon will have to face.

Fear of Elections

It's that rotgut, queasy stomach, sweat it out, expect the worst time again ... a liberal waiting for November 2 to be over. I've been through this eight times already and mostly it's been a bummer. But none quite so bad as this year. And that's from somebody who had to live through Reagan as governor as well as the endless presidency - and post presidency. But this time it got so bad I actually had to read a poll.

And then I had to read all the Swing State polls. And then the whole enchilada of polls. And then I sharpened a pencil and went to work on the back of the 2004 Election Scorecard I had printed out. Every poll for every undetermined state since the middle of September to... tonight. Three columns: Kerry, Bush, Other (the trash bin category that included Nader, undecideds, & anybody or anything else) plus the last date of the poll with the latest poll on top.

It was just simple arithmatic. Either a "trend" (difference between the earliest and last poll number) or an average of all polls, and sometimes both. I never really looked at the "other" category.

And you know what? I have discovered a wonderful thing. Poll Obsession trumps Fear of Elections. And, according to my calculations, this ninth presidential election is going to be my lucky one.

Poll position

In late October 2000, the polls consistently showed Bush over Gore by anywhere from 5 points to 13 points. I remember going into election day convinced by the confident, well-dressed people on my TV that Gore didn't have a chance. I remember being stunned that night to see that it was even close. The unions came out for Gore in huge numbers. African Americans rallied to Gore with historic levels of support. Pennsylvania? Michigan? He wasn't supposed to have a chance there. Florida within reach? Madness.

The Angry Liberal did better than just remember all this. They found a page in the CNN archives from late October, with CNN/USA Today/Gallup showing Bush beating Gore 52% to 39%. That's 52% to 39%. One more time: 52% to 39%. The thing is, they weren't alone. I remember the polls consistently calling for a Bush stomping. And yet surprinsgly enough, Gore won the popular vote. They weren't off by the margin of error. They were off by a multiple of the margin of error.

Remember all that this weekend. They misunderestimated our enthusiasm last time. We won't get misunderestimated again. Ready the buntings. Color code your confetti. It's winning time.

(credit where credit's due department -- DailyKos pointed me toward The Angry Liberal.)

Happy days are already here again

[Cecil, if you don't smile over this, please report to an ER.]

Thursday evening, homeward commute time; corner of Treat Bl. and Clayton Rd. in Concord, California (medium-size intersection in a medium-size suburb):

A dozen people scattered around all the sidewalks, waving Kerry/Edwards signs.

Now, this is antithesis of a battleground state. And it's in a town where the House, Senate, and state leg. races are guaranteed to go Democratic. So what are we to make of curbside campaigning in this setting?

I can only assume we're redefining "irrational exuberance."

Bush on the Hook

Street poet Wordsworth from the Slam Bush convention in Florida

Pretty cool. You have to stick with it past the part where Bush is "kicking his game."
It didn't stream for me, but it downloaded for replay.

I know I'm obssessing with the Hip-Hop angle, but we kids feel so misunderstood.

Fight the Power!

Dropping Props* for Eminem (of Battleground Detroit, MI)

*Props, i.e., proper respect

This from Rolling Stone: [BTW, the post-11/2 dates don't mean anything. The song will get its play--after this "leak"--before the election, and the issue of the magazine (despite its "cover date") will also be out.]

Eminem Talks Bush Song
Rapper calls Iraq war "mess," blames president

Eminem's upcoming album, Encore, due November 16th, features the fierce anti-Bush song "Mosh," which was leaked online today. In the Dr. Dre-produced track, the rapper denounces the war in Iraq.

Rebel with a rebel yell, raise hell,
We gonna let him know
Stomp, push, shove, mush, fuck Bush
Until they bring our troops home...
Let the president answer on higher anarchy
Strap him with an AK-47, let him go fight his own war
Let him impress daddy that way . . . No more blood for oil.

"[Bush] has been painted to be this hero, and he's got our troops over there dying for no reason," says Eminem in an upcoming Rolling Stone cover story (on stands November 5th). "I think he started a mess . . . He jumped the gun, and he fucked up so bad he doesn't know what to do right now . . . We got young people over there dyin', kids in their teens, early twenties that should have futures ahead of them. And for what? It seems like a Vietnam 2. Bin Laden attacked us, and we attacked Saddam. Explain why that is. Give us some answers."

The thirty-two-year-old rapper says he has registered to vote for the first time -- but stops short of endorsing a candidate. "Whatever my decision is, I would like to see Bush out of office," Eminem says. "I don't wanna see my little brother get drafted -- he just turned eighteen. People think their votes don't count, but people need to get out and vote. Every motherfuckin' vote counts."

The final push

Looking for something to do? I got this message from Dan Robinson (lately working on Advokit) last week. He's good people:

For me this project is all about empowerment of the grassroots. That Dean thing - the real legacy of our work over the last year and a half. AdvoKit is designed to bring people back into the process. While the functionality is pretty standard - what is revolutionary about AdvoKit is that it allows EVERYONE to express themselves. While MoveOn and the Kerry Campaign and the Democratic Party have similar systems that do similar things they are proprietary to those organizations - they have the power - not you.

You are all over committed - but if any of you are looking for something to do to take back this country between now and Nov. 2nd I would like to invite you to participate in this exercise.

votercall.org is designed to facilitate GOTV messages to over a million newly registered voters in swing states (and beyond). These are folks who have been registered by the big non-profit registration drives like Working Assets, True Majority, and a host of others. While there are extensive ground based GOTV operations targetting many who were registered - OVER 1 MILLION are not being reached. We have over 30K names of Minority, Low-income, Young voters in FL right now who will not be contacted unless we reach them before Nov. 2nd.

I would like to ask you to consider doing the following -

1. Sign up at www.votercall.org and make some phone calls.
2. Join our team. We have paid positions for caller support and quality assurance between now and Nov. 2nd.
3. Volunteer as an eLeader. AdvoKit is designed to enable small teams to work together to make a difference - but we need team leaders (we have thousands of team members). eLeaders will assist the most active callers (we have one woman in AK who has committed to making 2004 calls before Nov 2nd) make their phone calls by providing coaching and tech support. You can also build your own team - recruit folks (from our EB4Dem list!) and make this happen.

The here and now versus the hereafter

Both sides in this election have an X factor -- for the Democrats it's arguably (as has been noted elsewhere on Edgewise) the young, their fear for their futures. In particular, its their fear of an impending draft. They're voting for their lives. Polls consistently show this group of young voters as the Kerry's strongest supporters.

For the Republicans, it may well be religious fundamentalists, whatever their exact faith. Folks who are convinced for one reason or another that a vote for Kerry is a mortal sin. Bad news from Iraq or a weak jobs report won't change their mind. They're going into that booth and they're pulling the lever for life everlasting.

Of course millions of us believe you can have it both ways. I'm voting for Kerry and, as the cliche goes, I see that vote as both good and good for me.

But needless to say, not everyone shares my particular set of values. And it all makes for an interesting subtext, come Tuesday next. Which fear will draw more votes? Faith can be an extraordinarily powerful force. But this time around, my money's on the here and now.

Challenging the 'undecided' majority

All this talk about the dwindling undecideds and their seeming inability to get with the polarization program has led me to think that maybe the sense of urgency that is driving both left and right activists this year is a form of common ground we can build on.

Maybe I should try to get my pinko friends and my wingnut buddies together into an Activist party or a Decided Party. They disagree on what to do, but they all agree it's important.

The undecideds endless profiled in newspapers with their statistically arbitrary views don't necessarily represent the silent majority of eligible voters who vote every four years by not voting.

Maybe the 52% not voting were saying "we don't care - status quo is OK - we don't think we have anything to add."

The Undecided party was in the majority, but depending on how many vote this year, we Decideds may actually get a majority of eligible voters this year. Win or lose, that might be a step in the right direction.

In that spirit of unipartisanship, permit me to point you to a bit of found sound that might make even the most hard-hearted liberal bleed a bit for a man who's gotten in over his head.

Encouraging Report Today Re: "The Kids Are Alright"

Poll Finds Pro-Kerry Vote Fever at Colleges
LA Times

"[A]ccording to a poll released Thursday by Harvard University...84% of students said they would 'definitely be voting' this year, compared with 50% who said so in the spring of 2000."

"The poll surveyed...210 campuses in 48 states. Students...preferred Kerry over Bush, 52% to 39%....The Massachusetts senator led Bush by 17 percentage points in 14 battleground states, some of which have college populations significant enough to tilt the outcome in a close election."

"A second poll released Thursday, surveying a broader group of young people [i.e.. not just students] aged 18 to 29, also showed a Kerry lead. In that survey, released by ABC News, 57% favored Kerry and 38% chose Bush. That contrasted with the 2000 election, in which young voters mirrored the divide in the general population, with 48% for Democrat Al Gore and 46% for Bush."

FYI

Washington Post

[T]he Indian Health Service, was created by treaties drawn more than a century ago that promised quality health care (along with quality education and decent housing) for every Native American in exchange for the federal government's taking vast swaths of Indian land.

But the health service, run by the Department of Health and Human Services, is funded at less than $2,000 per Indian each year, half of what federal prisoners receive. This year, Congress rejected legislation to increase its budget. The administration redirected Indian Health Service funding to homeland security and the Iraq war.

Arise and walk

Guardian Unlimited | Guardian daily comment | Sidney Blumenthal: America's hidden vote:

Since 2002 ... what can only be called a new Democratic party has been summoned into existence by extra-party groups. More than 100,000 activists are tramping through the precincts. In Ohio alone, more than 300,000 new Democratic voters have been added, Cecile Richards, director of America Votes, told me. These registrations of literally millions of new voters did not just happen; they were organised.

The polls, nearly all showing a dead-even race, fail to account for the new voters, who have no past records. They do not measure those for whom a mobile is their main phone - 6% of the population - who will vote Democrat by a margin of two-and-a-half to one.

The Democracy Corps poll, however, filters in newly registered voters. Four months ago, the newly registered made up only 1% of the sample. One month ago, they comprised 4%. Now they are at 7% and rising. And they will vote for Kerry over Bush by 61% to 37%.

Maybe the other side should stop mocking Edwards' Lazarus act, in which he strongly implied that President Science would have helped Christopher Reeves get up and walk by any means necessary.

Seems that the Republicans have gotten sloppy about reinforcing their opponents message, the way Bush has made "Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time" into more of a mantra than Kerry was ever able to do.

It's almost as if Bush, as Daffy Duck, has been tricked by Kerry as Bugs, who keeps "misplaying" that song until until Daffy finally can't resist pushing him aside and saying, No, no, you're doing it wrong and hitting the note with the booby trap attached.

Hey look! I'm being bipartisan!

Let's form a progressive alliance with Bull Moose Republicans.

I'm no fan of Scoop Jackson per se, but I'd like to see more moderate and principled Republicans, so I'm willing to talk.

Talk about your Manchurian candidate

Wouldn't it be strange if left-wing sleeper agents infiltrated the Republican party like the Russians posing as Americans in that Charles Bronson film and under the guise of a "new" form of conservatism, introduced a bizarre almost Trotskyist foreign policy and will to power that succeeded in duping America's foremost right-wing party into self-destructing?

It would be just like the left to put our nation at risk by trying to heighten the contradictions to such a drastic degree.

Good thing we're not living in some strange kind of Philip K. Dick type universe in which, say, one of the characters in the novel is played by a movie actor who marries into the anti-Nixon political dynasty and goes on to be the governor of the state in a time of heightened security alerts and competing versions of reality.

The Kids Are Alright

A lot of people have been wowed by the intensity of campaign communication this year. Fair enough. It has been intense.

But not intense like the Green Day back-beat, or Hip-Hop's "Vote or Die," or the amped-up slackers of 2004. I think there may be an intensity of yet a higher order still in store.

We tend to forget the shock and suddenness, the power-chord crescendos that can be released when the America of youth pumps up the volume. Every ten minutes, every tenth caller, on radio, boom-rides, MTV, BET, VH1, Star-Power and Text-Messaging--Cleveland, Philadelphia, Detroit--the whole municipal Pantheon of Rhythm.

If this wish does come true, if an awakened youth can be acknowledged to have gotten together and turned the tide this year, they will never forget it, and it will shape the remainder of their American political lives.

Frequently asked questions at EnjoyTheDraft.com

Enjoy The Draft - Drunken FAQ:

BUT BUSH SAYS HE WON'T INSTITUTE A DRAFT. WHY SHOULD WE THINK HE WILL?

Because Bush says he won't institute a draft.

IS IT POSSIBLE HE JUST WON'T CALL IT A "DRAFT"? LIKE INSTEAD HE'LL GIVE IT SOME ORWELLIAN DOUBLESPEAK NAME?

Beware the "No 18-to-25-Year-Old Left Behind Act."

SERIOUSLY?

No, just kidding. Actually, it's Americans from age 18 to 34 who can expect to enjoy the new, improved, co-ed draft. That's right! Girls can enjoy the new draft, too. And, lucky folks with special skills like languages, computers, and healthcare can enjoy the draft up to the age of 44.

(Lucky dogs.)

DOES THAT MEAN WE MIGHT SERVE WITH JENNA AND BARBARA BUSH?

Absolutely. The Bushes would never use their connections to influence where or how a family member serves.

OK, SO BASED ON HIS RECORD, BUSH SEEMS LIKELY TO REINSTATE THE DRAFT. BUT ARE YOU IMPLYING THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH JOINING THE MILITARY?

Absolutely not. On the contrary, fighting to make America safer is perhaps the noblest endeavor an American can undertake. Unfortunately, the Bush administration hasn't quite figured out how to combine the "fighting" part with the "make America safer" part.

Simon World blogs Zogby's Hong Kong talk

John Zogby thinks the race is still Kerry's to lose. Simon disagrees but finds many of Zogby's insights compelling.

Here are a few that struck me:

Red vs. Blue

• This election is a repeat of 2000 in many ways, and Florida and Ohio are the key states this time.


• The "Armageddon Election": the US has 2 equal sized warring factions divided ideologically, demographically and culturally. Cicero at Winds of Change has an interesting post on the same lines.


• The key difference: married vs. singles whom have never married. On every poll this is the key predictor of voting intention, even when broken down by sex and age.

The Missing Centre

• In the past the candidates tend to move to the centre in the last few weeks of the campaign and sound similar as they fight over the middle ground. This time each candidate is talking to their bases as if the centre doesn't exist - because it doesn't.


• Why is the centre missing? Bush won in 2000 with 48% of the popular vote but rather than reaching for the centre, he started out from the right (Zogby though this was a squandered opportunity). The 4 million Christian Conservative "myth" of Karl Rove meant Bush wanted to pander to them to shore his support up and push his numbers up over 50% and hold them there for 4 years, rather than reach across to conservative Al Gore voters. This explains why Bush quickly rescinded Clinton's environmental orders and decision on Government money for family planning groups that support abortion - he was chasing the CCs. On September 1, 2001 Bush was at 49%.


• The "rubber ball" analogy: Bush had three poll bounces since 2001, but each one has been shallower and shorter than the next.


• Post 9/11 he went to 85%....Zogby notes the Sept 20th speech to Congress and the incident when Bush was talking to a group of iron workers, police and firefighters at Ground Zero (when some called out "We can't hear you", Bush responded "I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear from of all us soon," as two key attempts to connect with the entire population.


• However with 10 days of 9/11 Zogby did a poll, asking do you support the War on Terror (WoT)? 91% said yes. When asked would the support the WoT if it lasted one year, it went down to 77%; for 2 years, down to 67% and more than 2 years 55%. Zogby took this to mean the US still suffered from a post-Vietnam syndrome of wanting wars won quickly and troops out of harms way as quickly as possible.


• Fast forward to March 2003, just prior to the bombing of Baghdad. Bush's approval is at 53%. Post bombing bounces to 67% but the bounce didn't last long: by mid-May he was back to 50% and it didn't budge. Over the (northern) Summer of 2003 the opposition to the war on Iraq turned angry, and that is the first time that talk of the "stolen" 2000 election emerged.


• The final bounce. In December 2003, when Saddam was captured, Bush went to 56% but within 2 weeks was back to 50% again.

The Democrats

• Before the primaries started 66 - 73% of registered Democrats in key states thought they couldn't beat Bush. When asked, they stated in 2:1 ratio they wanted someone they believed in rather than someone who could beat Bush. This explains the rise of Howard Dean. By December Dean was up 7% in Iowa, 36% in New Hampshire and a couple of points in South Carolina. Dean's problem was the primaries happened too late.


• Zogby cannot explain why but he didn't poll between Christmas and New Year. When polling restarted in January 2004 suddenly things shifted. The new polls had 85% of Democrats thought a Democrat could beat Bush and now in 3:1 ratio they wanted someone who could win.


• John Kerry was the last man standing in Iowa, despite until then running a woeful (my notes say shit, but I don't think Zogby used that word) campaign. There had been too much "nuance" and explanations that would fit trains, not bumper stickers. Zogby said "Presidential candidates need bumper stickers, not trains."


• Suddenly in January 2004 his message was simplified to three points: I can win, I'm a veteran and I'm experienced. He gained a point a day while Gephardt and Dean lost a point a day each and so once Kerry won Iowa the momentum was unstoppable. On Jan 10th Kerry was at 10% in Iowa; once his numbers crossed Dean's then Kerry's numbers took off and didn't look back.


• A key quote from a Kerry staffer: "John always knows when his homework is due." The Presidential debate was another example of this, getting the message right at the right time (although hopefully not too late).

Key States

• Penn., Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin and Florida. Each one is very close. His latest numbers are showing 46 Kerry 45 Bush but no clues on the undecideds still.


• The potential surprise states are Bush in Iowa and Wisconsin and Kerry in Virginia, New Hampshire and Colorado.

Money

• It is unusual but at this stage of the race Kerry has more money than Bush to spend.
• Kerry's fundraising efforts were greatly assisted by a motivated base and by good use of the internet, learning from Howard Dean.

The Running

• The race is Kerry's to lose, barring unforeseen events. If he loses, it is only his fault.
• Why? Because Bush's numbers have not gone above 48%. Three other key polling indicators are all terrible for Bush amongst undecideds:
  1. Presidential job performance: 35% positive versus 60% negative
  2. Is the country headed in the right direction? net negative
  3. Does the President deserve re-election? 15% yes versus 40% no.
  These numbers have always been net negative for Bush amongst undecideds. The last 3 Presidents with those numbers were Carter, Ford and Bush I. None won.
• Another reason: undecideds tend to break for the challenger. Zogby sees them going like in Reagan in 1980, so that the margin is 2% but it is the same in each key state and it is in favour of Kerry, thus the Electoral Vote ends in a decisive victory.
• A higher turnout favours Kerry. 2000 election had 105 million voters. Anything over 107 million this time and Kerry will win.
• The youth vote: always heavily Democrat, this time the youth vote are unusually motivated and may turn out in bigger numbers than expected, tipping the race to Kerry.
• If the focus of the final two weeks is the War on Terror... Bush wins.
• If the focus of the final two weeks is Iraq and/or domestic issues... Kerry wins.
• If the result is like in 2000 there will be masses and months of litigation. Neither side will back down and it will be complete chaos, far worse than 2000.

Nader

• Nader is a spent force and irrelevant to the campaign. He does not take votes from Kerry.


• Voters for Nader would otherwise have not voted at all, so no loss to either side.

The mobile phone question

• What is the impact of the increased use of mobile phones on the accuracy of polling?


• 6% of all adults and 15% of under 30s have only mobiles, with no land line phone. Does this introduce a bias in polling?


• Zogby has tested this and seen no reason to expect these mobile-only adults will be any different (i.e. there is no anti-liberal bias).


• On a slightly different question, young voters are always under-represented in polling and Zogby weights to increase their representation. He is using higher weights this time compared to 2000 due to increased activism.

Differences between polls

• While being diplomatic, Zogby basically said Gallup's numbers are junk. They use different methodologies but Gallup's variations from poll to poll are too big to be creditable. In Zogby's polling Kerry and Bush both bounce between 44 an 48, and haven't deviated from that range.


• Zogby maintains the same proportions of party affiliations in each poll as he doesn't think that number changes much, which cuts the variability down.


• He was emphatic there is no bias in his or any other polling organisation he knows. To have bias would be the death of any polling firm.

Internet, blogs and the election

• The impact of the Internet has been huge. In 1996 about 4% of voters got most of their political information from the net. In 2000 it was 31%. For 2004 it will be in excess of 50%.
• The second key impact has been in fundraising. Firstly Howard Dean, then John Kerry have used the internet to balance out and neutralise the fundraising power of Bush and the Republicans. Ironically Al Gore, the "father" of the net, didn't capture this avenue in 2000.
• Blogs: Zogby saw these as important, with each having its own constituency. However they are unlikely to change minds; instead "they serve to stoke the fires of anger." In other words, blogs are preaching to the converted.
• Zogby reads Real Clear Politics daily but I didn't get a chance to find out if he follows any others.

Kerry, Bush Trade Charges

"I''ll give you Nincompoop and In Denial, if you give me Flip-Flopper and Liberal."

"Flip-Flopper AND Liberal? You've got to be kidding!"

If Kerry had been president, Saddam would still be in power

Then again, if Bush had been president, Osama would still be at large.

My beef with Greenspan

In a discussion thread at Kos two days ago (Daily Kos :: Comments Kill the moderators) a fellow called johnmorris succinctly put the hammer down on Alan Greenspan's disingenuous betrayal of our nation's social compact with its frail and elderly:

in 1983 Greenspan predicted disaster for Social Security unless we doubled the withholding tax and built up a reserve so we did it. With the reserve built up and the budget in surplus Greenspan waltzes in and tells congress they need to pass the tax cut to avoid "paying down the debt too fast". When the tax cut puts the budget into deficit the bastard jumps up and says we have to cut social security. Fuck him, he's a cheap suit hustler.

I've never heard the term "cheap-suit hustler" before (although I have heard of the Cheap-Suit Serenaders), but I like the sound of that, and I think the profanity is warranted too.

Too bad we got distracted by the lockbox folly last time around. Meanwhile, the foxes have been guarding the chicken coop.

Rhythmic mash

If you're still conscious and interested in reliving a few highlights from tonight's debate, I made a wee rhythmic mash out of a few of the better moments -- it's a 1:45 mp3 with drums n keys. Pick it up at ye olde Monkey Vortex Radio Theater .

OK. Enough of that. Off to sleep. Then off to Oregon this weekend with xian and the reverend for some GOTV. Victory is nigh....

Peace out, -Cecil

Operation Truth

If you haven't heard about Operation Truth yet, please take a minute and pay them a visit. Worth your time. And in my opinion, if you can spare it, worth a donation.

Here's a little bit about them:

Operation Truth is a non-profit (501c4), non-partisan Veterans' organization that seeks to amplify the soldiers' voice in the American public dialogue. American servicemen and women have a voice that deserves to be heard; the issues and hardships troops face merit attention. Additionally, American servicemen and women have a distinct and important perspective that can influence the American political scene in a powerful way.

Good news for Dems in Pennsylvania

From my cousin Sean: Philadelphia Daily News | 10/11/2004 | Voter registration up in Pa.:

Biggest surge in urban areas and on college campuses

With new registrations in the city running 9-1 Democratic, that could add somewhere close to 100,000 extra voters for the Kerry ticket. With statewide turnout likely to be in the vicinity of 5 million voters, that could add two percentage points for the Democrats.

Statewide, the total number of registered voters in Pennsylvania was said to be hitting 8 million, much higher than the 7.7 million registered to vote in the state's April primaries or the 7.8 million who were registered to vote in 2000.

Officials said earlier this month that counties were inundated with registration forms - so much so that Officials were working overtime and on Saturdays to handle them all.

Without final numbers, they said statewide tally seemed to be leaning Democratic. Democrats already had a roughly 500,000-voter edge over Republicans this past spring.

Beat on the brat

OK, the whole "hunchback of nutter spin" / Bush-wired is either getting legs from the strangest of places or is being helped along by a diabolical Democratic ratfucking campaign.

What interests me in some of the latest gossipy developments is the "everybody knows that" gambit that sometimes leaks out of the right when one of their depradations is about to be exposed.

They are past masters at swiveling from "butter wouldn't melt in my mouth" choirboys to condescending cynics when it suits.

Some Republicans are saying that "everyone knows" Bush and others in his administration sometimes use an audio prompt to stay on message.

This latest tidbit involves a comment in the Daily Kos :: Comments Bush's Interpreter - Bush DOES Use an Earpiece thread at Daily Kos) that refers to an alleged dispute between two Republicans on the [Portlant Internet Media Center] site.

Brad Menfil of Knoxville

I have contacts within the Republican Party. I was told by Scott Zale, a Repulican operative in eastern Tennessee that he knows it to be a fact that Bush was wired. He said that within the Bush campaign, there are certain mid-level staffers that have leaked this tidbit because it was just "too fantastic to ignore."

Zale told me that the transmission device is popular with other high profile officials in the Bush administration. It helps everybody stay "on message." Zale said that Bush was only fed ready responses to just certain types of questions. He didn't know which questions those were but admitted that Bush just sounded(to him)to be more articulate at certain "oportune" times.

Zale confided that he was told that the president wore a loose fitting jacket during both debates. The device protuded because Bush has a tendency to hunch over and shrug his shoulders a lot.

This is a true story as it was told to me. If you want to know more, please contact Scott Zale at the Bush-Cheney campaign headquarters in Knoxville, Tn. Thanks

Scott Zale

Please shut down this blog. I was informed this morning by the national editor of the Knoxville Times that my name was invoked by a man named "Brad Menfil" in regards to this out-of-control story.

It is true that I work for Bush-Cheney here in Tennessee. My office is in Gatlinburg, not Knoxville. Although I do happen to work at least two days a week in Knoxville. I am a staff accountant and one of my duties is to process local contributions. As part of that duty, I have to wire funds to the national committee in Washington D.C. So I do have national Republican contacts and have heard many things.

"Brad" is not his real name but I suspect he is or may be my counterpart in the Washington collections office. He has probably been to Tennessee about 15 times in the last 7 weeks, though he does not live here. I won't give his real name (even though he felt it was necessary to give mine).

The Knoxville Times called me at 6am this morning asking me to confirm or deny the "Bush is Wired" story they read here at Portland IMC. My immediate response was, "What is the Portland IMC?" and I then I issued a "no comment". Other than that, I did say that "Brad Menfil" is not a real person.

Please stop speculating about this. Our president is a great man and can only get hurt by this. I suspect this isn't going to go away and I regret anything that I said to "Brad" that may contribute to downfall of a great man and president.

Please drop this for the good of our country. We have bigger problems and should not be distracted by matters that don't ultimately determine the measure of an honest man. I want to say that the right answers are what matter most, not whether or not those answers were "fed" my someone else. President Bush is a good messenger regardless.

Thanks, Scott Zale, Senior Staff Accountant, Bush-Cheney Tennessee.

Brad Menfil

Scott Zale is right, "Brad Menfil" is not my real name and I didn't hear this story from him, he heard it from me. Sorry Scott.

I do work for Bush-Cheney and I can olny say that the substance of my first posting is correct, even though I used a fake name. I hope everybody understands why I would do this.

I got a call from Scott this morning (actually, about 10 minutes ago). He said that he had been contacted by ABC and Fox after his own posting.

I don't share his belief that ignoring this would be good for the country. I'm sorry I involved Scott and didn't have enough courage to use my real name. I hope the truth gets out and Scott is absolved.

Thanks for reading this, "Brad Menfil."

It just smells phony to me. A hoax, if a cleverly nested one. It shouldn't be too hard to track down the named operative if he exists. The thread letter claims that the Knoxville Times newspaper cited in the argument is also a fake.

At this point Occam's razor tells me that the bulge is in fact a vest, either a bulletproof vest (in which case the lie that he isn't wearing one is part of his security procedures) or something for his terrible posture (in which case the lie that he isn't wearing anything is intended to preserve his image as someone who doesn't need help standing up straight).

This picture from the indymedia thread looks to me like a padded vest yoke:

More strange things to say in a debate

If you're a mom and you're pregnant and you get killed....

How big can that voting bloc be?

Is Wolcott on a roll or what?

Wow. James Wolcott nails the hypocrisy of upper-class journalists trying to fit in with the jes' folks phonies:

Howling Wolf: "Democrats like Gore and Kerry have to weigh and calibrate their every move because one ill-chosen word or phrase or gesture will be tattooed across their fore[head] by the media's trained monkeys. I mean, Kerry will have to be very careful how he introduces Christopher Reeve's name into the stem-cell argument because the press will be waiting to pounce on any sign of emotional opportunism on his part. Whereas Bush can continue to talk slop and get a free pass, just as Reagan did whenever he tipped his head to the side and sawdust leaked out of his ear. I was naive enough to think that Bush's tantrum the other night at the townhall debate would get at least half of the coverage and mockery that Howard Dean's infamous scream received, which was foolish of me. Our great editors and pundits have apparently decided to avert their eyes from a rageaholic president with presenile dementia who needs to have answers fed to him from a boxy receiver because - well, at least he's not conceited."

George Bush and the Gore Hat Trick

Watching SNL last night, it's really looking like Bush is setting himself up to repeat the Gore hat trick, which goes roughly like this:

Debate 1, surprise everyone by being exceptionally bad in an easy-to-imitate and easy-to-dislike sort of way.

Debate 2, be not quite so bad, but change gears from Debate 1 so dramatically that everyone notices and scratches their heads. If at all possible, have persona number two be equally easy-to-imitate and easy-to-dislike.

Great, now pause briefly over the weekend to watch yourself get brutalized on SNL in a skit that neatly captures all this badness.

That's where we are today. Last night, SNL savaged Bush while leaving Kerry basically untouched. Savaged. Meanwhile, the tone of their one big Kerry joke (basically him saying "I can't stop talking") struck me as borderline warm and fuzzy. You could see the change in tone from just the week before, when the jokes fell about 50/50. Bush is turning into the butt of jokes. Sure, all presidents are the butt of jokes. And he's been ridiculed for eons now on The Daily Show and such. But this is different. Like Gore, he's becoming a figure of ridicule.

So here comes Debate 3 on Wednesday. Back in 2000, many felt Gore actually found his voice by Debate 3. But it was too late. He got thumped for changing his style yet again. And for many, the sense that he was laughable (the opposite of presidential) stuck through Election Day.

Now Bush faces a similar problem. Who will show up to the next debate? Will we get Smirky Bush? Or President Shouts-a-lot? A third approach, I think we all expect. Maybe even a better approach. But as we saw with Gore, it's awfully late in the game to be trying out new personalities on the national stage. All the more so for a candidate whose campaign is hinged on the pitch that he's the model of consistency.

I wondered about this too

ToughEnough.org: Bush said what?:

The truth of the matter is if you listen carefully Saddam would still be in power if he were the president of the United States. And the world would be a lot better off.

Whuzza now? This is like the mother of all malapropisms.

From tinfoil hat to NY Times in one week

The whole was Bush wearing a wire? story really seems to have legs.

Of course, Cecil noticed something odd was up back in April September of 2003 (His lips almost moving)*.

A little more fuel for the fire: Bush the articulate... hearing voices, padded bulge from second debate, wiregate, the type of wire we mean

* and later referred to his "tiny Bill Kristol" metaphor in April of this year (Deep thoughts on tonight's presidential press conference)

My advice to Kos

Kos is polling his readers for ideas about his election-season column for the Guardian (UK). Here's the comment I just posted to the thread:

Write about ABC/Halpern/objectivity issue else they'll just get Glennbot's view of it, which will be so slanted as to produce an unconscious meta-parody of the issue at hand.

plus, it ties in with the growing dissatisfaction with objectivity as a pseudo-ideal of american journalism that, as Josh Marshall says, favors liars.

then again, a lot of the other ideas are good and you can footnote this issue by pointing to TPM just as you could give your British readers a key to Halperin by pointing to Jay Rosen's column on it.

Finally: Bushes loses slam contest, film at 11

He's nearly speechless. Me too. It's just another example of high-technology put to good purpose. Well worth your time. Checkitout, here.